| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"brian fletcher" |
| Date: |
07 Nov 2007 05:46:00 PM |
| Object: |
Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
.
|
|
| User: "Immortalist" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 11:57:58 PM |
|
|
On Nov 7, 3:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
You should say instead of "free to develope" say "(more) free but
still contrained by elites becuse of scarce resources and overly-tight
market areas. It would take to much imagination to visualize a time
when these differences could be institutionalized to the point of
limiting opportunity to fmily lines. Man think of the way that things
have been with Royal families and Kingships and all, how this might as
well have been a caste system. Below is an old argument that needs
revising to illustrate my idea;
....the U.S. has too many markets where the "star" or top performer
gets a large percentage of the proceeds. Examples are the sports
market, the movie star market and the publishing market; The reasons
given are;
-Technology. National distribution channels such as network television
make it easier for an individual to penetrate the market. For example,
at one time villages and towns had their own musicians. Now a singer
can make a CD and sell it nationally.
-Falling transportation and tariff costs. Goods have gotten lighter.
It is easier to send computer discs all over the world than books.
CD's are lighter than phonograph records
-- Mental shelf space constraints. We have a limit to the number of
items we can keep in our head..."the amount of information we can
actually use is thus a declining fraction of the total information
available."
-Weakening of regulations and civil society. At one time, informal and
formal rules limited the winner take all markets. Now, like free
agents in baseball, the top performers have the leverage to demand
high prices.
-Self-reinforcing processes. This is another way of saying "success
begets success." For example, a sales person does well and gets bigger
customers. A person does well and the word of mouth referral causes
them to saturate the market. This virtuous cycle increases the income
and power of top performers.
....winner take all markets are not good for society. People are
unrealistically optimistic about their own chances of winning "a
prize." Thus they are siphoned off from other productive endeavors.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0140259953/
The President of the United States earns far less money than the CEOs
of mid-sized corporations. Should we worry that we are not paying him
enough to attract qualified applicants? Probably not, for two reasons.
First, the perks of the presidency yield a real pay vastly greater
than the official salary. Second, the presidency is an example of a
winner-take-all competition, and winner-take-all competitions have a
tendency to over-attract entrants.1
The argument that winner-take-all contests tend to over-attract
entrants closely parallels the argument that the problem of the
commons yields inefficiency: people respond to average benefit rather
than to marginal benefit. An example may help explain the logic
involved.
Suppose we have a two-occupation world. The inhabitants of Nirvana can
be peasants, at which they all are equally good and produce output
valued at $1000 per person. (We can assume there is an export market
to avoid the problem of diminishing marginal utility and a downward-
sloping demand curve.) Or they can compete to be the ceremonial chief
which has benefits to the winner of $100,000 and nothing at all to the
losers. The value of the chief to the inhabitants depends on the
quality of chief.
Suppose further that each year the inhabitants have to make a decision
to be peasants or to compete to be chief. Also assume that at the
beginning of each year no one has any reason to believe he is any more
or less likely to be able to win the competition even though abilities
are not equally distributed for this task. How many people should
compete for this job? If all were equally able, or if we could
identify the best candidate from the start, the answer is, "Only one."
If all were equally able, we could select one by lottery, and if we
could identify ability with a simple test, we could use that test to
select the winner. But suppose the situation is more complex, and that
only after a year of intensive training will the best candidate be
apparent. The larger the group of persons who compete for the
position, the more talented the winner can be expected to be. (For the
same reason we expect a high school that has 10,000 students to
dominate athletic competition with a high school with only 100
students--the bigger the pool of possible athletes, the more likely it
is that one with exceptional talent will emerge.) What is the best
number, the economically-efficient number, of candidates?
Using marginal principles, we can see that the society should continue
adding candidates to the pool as long as adding another increases the
expected return by more than $1000 (the value of the candidate as a
peasant). If a pool of ten candidates can be expected to yield a chief
whose value in the job is $70,000, and a pool of eleven applicants can
be expected to yield a winner who provides $72,000 worth of value,
then it is in the interests of the society to have at least eleven
competing. If adding the eleventh candidate increases expected yield
only to $70,900, then the society would get more value if the eleventh
applicant remained a peasant. As the pool gets bigger, adding an
additional person can be expected to yield diminishing returns.
How will the applicants see the competition? Suppose there are only
ten in the pool. Would another person find it attractive to join
knowing that the value of the position to the winner will be $100,000?
If each thinks he has an equal chance to get the prize, the expected
value of entering is $10,000, and this would draw in additional people
if they are not bothered by the risk. In fact if they were risk
neutral and understood the payoffs, one hundred people would want to
be in that pool because they will keep joining as long as the average
expected value is greater than $1000. But since the average expected
value will fall as more people join, the marginal expected value must
lie below the average. Hence, if the value of being chief as perceived
by the society is not much smaller than the value of being chief as
seen by the winner, there will be a tendency for too many candidates
to compete for chiefdom. Nirvana would be better off if some them
remained peasants. 2
Political offices, NBA basketball careers, and lives as Hollywood
movie stars are examples of competitions which are either winner-take-
all competitions, or a very close to winner-take-all situations. There
is a fixed number of players who fit on the rosters of the NBA teams,
and while there is not fixed number of movie stars, the number that
people can pay attention to and that can be featured on the tabloids
is quite limited. Do we see too much effort expended competing for
these positions? Many observers believe so. For every person who makes
it into one of these financially rewarding positions, there are
hundreds or thousands who, despite great effort and sacrifice, do not
make it.
So back to are original question--do we pay the president enough? The
answer is, "Yes, unless the value to the citizens of a good president
is considerably bigger than the value the president gets from holding
the office." Perhaps you find the argument that the value of having a
good president is so large that we need even more people wanting to be
president, but I do not.
http://star2.vub.ac.be/~dvermeir/mirrors/ingrimayne.saintjoe.edu/econ/resouceProblems/WinnerTakeIt.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
09 Nov 2007 06:08:10 AM |
|
|
"Immortalist" <reanimater_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1194587878.886487.171650@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 3:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
You should say instead of "free to develope" say "(more) free but
still contrained by elites becuse of scarce resources and overly-tight
market areas.
Which part of you is so contained?
There are those who are truly enlightened. Couldnt be more "free".
Those born into radical Moslem cultures for example, with a 'broader'
perspective, usually have a cultural agenda...or end up as martyrs (not the
suiocidal variety)
It would take to much imagination to visualize a time
when these differences could be institutionalized to the point of
limiting opportunity to fmily lines. Man think of the way that things
have been with Royal families and Kingships and all, how this might as
well have been a caste system. Below is an old argument that needs
revising to illustrate my idea;
...the U.S. has too many markets where the "star" or top performer
gets a large percentage of the proceeds. Examples are the sports
market, the movie star market and the publishing market; The reasons
given are;
-Technology. National distribution channels such as network television
make it easier for an individual to penetrate the market. For example,
at one time villages and towns had their own musicians. Now a singer
can make a CD and sell it nationally.
Gee , your materialistic side is coming out here Imm.
You are starting to wonder way off....
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Immortalist" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
09 Nov 2007 11:01:56 PM |
|
|
Gee , your materialistic side is coming out here Imm.
You are starting to wonder way off....
Please explain your position since I thought I was using both examples
as illustrations of the human tendency to be slightly biased towards
xenophobia or the ingroup out group prejudace.
Xenophobia denotes a phobic attitude towards strangers or of the
unknown. It comes from the Greek words (xenos), meaning "foreigner,"
"stranger," and (phobos), meaning "fear." The term is typically used
to describe fear or dislike of foreigners or in general of people
different from one's self.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia
Unreflected Ingroup Favoritism - One who reflects does not
discriminate?: On the role of unreflected cognitive processes for the
occurrence of ingroup favoritism between artificial groups;
A categorization of individuals in two groups
based on completely trivial criteria like flipping
a coin to determine which group one is
assigned (Group X or Group Y), can
be sufficient to cause mutual
preferences for one's
own group.
Social identity theory assumes a fundamental striving towards a
positive distinction of one's own group from other groups. The
tendency to a preference for one's own group is clearly reduced in a
situation involving intergroup judgments on negative comparison
dimensions or distribution decisions on negative stimuli (burdens,
aversive stimuli), in comparison to those in the positive realm.
These basic judgment processes may be the fundamental determining
factors of and conditions for social discrimination. Of some influence
may be the role which evaluations of oneself play for the positive
evaluation of minimal social groups. It is assumed that an unreflected
cognitive process is critical for this, in the course of which, as a
rule, the positive self-image is transferred to the new ingroup. Due
to the lesser degree of similarity to oneself, an outgroup cannot
benefit from such a generalization process.
Correspondingly, a positive distinctiveness of one's own group can
result solely from the self-ingroup relation, independent of an
ingroup-outgroup comparison. There is a generalized positive attitude
to the ingroup, and demonstrating the role of a low degree of
reflection for the occurrence of favoritism in minimal intergroup
situations and considerations of outgroups.
The randomly assigned individuals generally act as if those who share
their meaningless label are their good friends or close kin. Subjects
indicate that they like those who share their label. They rate others
who share their label as likely to have a more pleasant personality
and to have produced better output than outgroup members. Most
strikingly, subjects allocate more money and rewards to those who
share their labels.
In other related social experiments at political rallies it has been
noted that researchers faking injuries, were helped more or less
depending on whether their protest sign, and slogans supported or went
against those around them who could help.
The Social Animal - Elliot Aronson - 8th Edition 1999
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0716733129/
BOfL- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Voice of Reason" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
09 Nov 2007 09:08:59 AM |
|
|
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
Hello - Nice group you have here.
I think this argument overlooks a central component of the Hindu
belief system as regards the caste system - the concept of dharma. I
also think you are placing a higher value on social mobility than
would any practitioner of Hinduism. That may be due to the fact that
you are a product of Western ideals. I am also a product of Western
ideals and tend to view life and its journey in a linear sense with
each step along my path in this one and only life as leading to a
higher level. However, if we want to understand why Hindus are often
satisfied to maintain the order of the caste system and do so with a
great deal of dignity, we will have to divorce ourselves from our
mindsets.
Despite the political or social control aspects that are clearly at
play in India, one can separate the purely ideological tenants of
Hinduism and come away with an appreciation for exactly why the people
are married to the caste system if you understand what dharma is and
how it can allow a person to find grace under pressure and self-
respect and inner strength in poverty.
Several posters mentioned karma, but I did not see anyone mention
dharma. Dharma is doing one's duty according to the caste in which one
was born. Hindus believe that it is better to do one's dharma poorly
than to do another's dharma well. Thus, they would be more inclined to
live out the role and duties of a lower caste if they were born into
that caste than to "strive" to live out the role and duties of a
higher caste if it were not their birth caste. If they expect their
karma to produce a good rebirth resulting in a higher caste placement,
they must do their dharma according to their current caste well. That
is how they can find peace and dignity regardless of caste in this
life.
Also, I think we are more inclined to value individualism in the West
because we do not view ourselves as being a part of a larger whole.
Hindus do see themselves as a part of a larger whole and would be less
likely to resent what we call group consciousness because they would
feel as though they were inextricably tied to the creation of that
group consciousness.
I am certain there are exceptions, though.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
09 Nov 2007 05:35:36 PM |
|
|
"Voice of Reason" <locust.of.control@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1194620939.774733.140580@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
Hello - Nice group you have here.
I think this argument overlooks a central component of the Hindu
belief system as regards the caste system - the concept of dharma. I
also think you are placing a higher value on social mobility than
would any practitioner of Hinduism. That may be due to the fact that
you are a product of Western ideals. I am also a product of Western
ideals and tend to view life and its journey in a linear sense with
each step along my path in this one and only life as leading to a
higher level. However, if we want to understand why Hindus are often
satisfied to maintain the order of the caste system and do so with a
great deal of dignity, we will have to divorce ourselves from our
mindsets.
Despite the political or social control aspects that are clearly at
play in India, one can separate the purely ideological tenants of
Hinduism and come away with an appreciation for exactly why the people
are married to the caste system if you understand what dharma is and
how it can allow a person to find grace under pressure and self-
respect and inner strength in poverty.
Several posters mentioned karma, but I did not see anyone mention
dharma. Dharma is doing one's duty according to the caste in which one
was born. Hindus believe that it is better to do one's dharma poorly
than to do another's dharma well. Thus, they would be more inclined to
live out the role and duties of a lower caste if they were born into
that caste than to "strive" to live out the role and duties of a
higher caste if it were not their birth caste. If they expect their
karma to produce a good rebirth resulting in a higher caste placement,
they must do their dharma according to their current caste well. That
is how they can find peace and dignity regardless of caste in this
life.
Also, I think we are more inclined to value individualism in the West
because we do not view ourselves as being a part of a larger whole.
Hindus do see themselves as a part of a larger whole and would be less
likely to resent what we call group consciousness because they would
feel as though they were inextricably tied to the creation of that
group consciousness.
I am certain there are exceptions, though.
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness gel..for the
good of the whole.
Being free of cultural influences , I have discovered the way of dharma is
universal, but has nothing whatever to to do with time of place.
My earlier point was regarding many seekers in the West believe that India
is the location for spiritual guidance.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gordge" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
10 Nov 2007 02:35:02 AM |
|
|
On Nov 10, 8:35 am, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness...
Is that when someone says something new and then immediately says "I
wish to withdraw what I have just said" but the rest scream out, "It
too fucking late now, its now a part of this group's consciuosness?
MG
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
10 Nov 2007 07:59:53 PM |
|
|
"Michael Gordge" <mikegordge@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1194683702.416872.215720@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 10, 8:35 am, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness...
Is that when someone says something new and then immediately says "I
wish to withdraw what I have just said" but the rest scream out, "It
too fucking late now, its now a part of this group's consciuosness?
MG
In a sense ...yes.
The history books are full of such examples.
One of the most impacting example, is that of Oppenheimer.After unleashing
his discovery of atom splitting, he realized how devastating it could become
in the hands of the 'majority'.
Gandhi, when he saw the civil war break out, had a similarrealization.
Of course, there are no mistakes, which is why you wiil never hear of true
mystics, because they do not communicate to the 'group'.
The people I refered to had a date with destiny, regarding the affairs of
communities and cultures.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gordge" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
10 Nov 2007 08:07:52 PM |
|
|
On Nov 11, 10:59 am, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
"Michael Gordge" <mikegor...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1194683702.416872.215720@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 10, 8:35 am, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness...
Is that when someone says something new and then immediately says "I
wish to withdraw what I have just said" but the rest scream out, "It
too fucking late now, its now a part of this group's consciuosness?
MG
In a sense ...yes.
Oh so in reality it's an individual's consciouness at the core and in
reality there's no such thing as a group consciousness?
MG
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
11 Nov 2007 08:25:46 AM |
|
|
"Michael Gordge" <mikegordge@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1194746872.439389.179000@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 11, 10:59 am, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
"Michael Gordge" <mikegor...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1194683702.416872.215720@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 10, 8:35 am, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness...
Is that when someone says something new and then immediately says "I
wish to withdraw what I have just said" but the rest scream out, "It
too fucking late now, its now a part of this group's consciuosness?
MG
In a sense ...yes.
Oh so in reality it's an individual's consciouness at the core and in
reality there's no such thing as a group consciousness?
MG
Why put a question mark, when you are not asking a question?
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Voice of Reason" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
10 Nov 2007 08:25:25 AM |
|
|
On Nov 9, 6:35 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
"Voice of Reason" <locust.of.cont...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1194620939.774733.140580@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
Hello - Nice group you have here.
I think this argument overlooks a central component of the Hindu
belief system as regards the caste system - the concept of dharma. I
also think you are placing a higher value on social mobility than
would any practitioner of Hinduism. That may be due to the fact that
you are a product of Western ideals. I am also a product of Western
ideals and tend to view life and its journey in a linear sense with
each step along my path in this one and only life as leading to a
higher level. However, if we want to understand why Hindus are often
satisfied to maintain the order of the caste system and do so with a
great deal of dignity, we will have to divorce ourselves from our
mindsets.
Despite the political or social control aspects that are clearly at
play in India, one can separate the purely ideological tenants of
Hinduism and come away with an appreciation for exactly why the people
are married to the caste system if you understand what dharma is and
how it can allow a person to find grace under pressure and self-
respect and inner strength in poverty.
Several posters mentioned karma, but I did not see anyone mention
dharma. Dharma is doing one's duty according to the caste in which one
was born. Hindus believe that it is better to do one's dharma poorly
than to do another's dharma well. Thus, they would be more inclined to
live out the role and duties of a lower caste if they were born into
that caste than to "strive" to live out the role and duties of a
higher caste if it were not their birth caste. If they expect their
karma to produce a good rebirth resulting in a higher caste placement,
they must do their dharma according to their current caste well. That
is how they can find peace and dignity regardless of caste in this
life.
Also, I think we are more inclined to value individualism in the West
because we do not view ourselves as being a part of a larger whole.
Hindus do see themselves as a part of a larger whole and would be less
likely to resent what we call group consciousness because they would
feel as though they were inextricably tied to the creation of that
group consciousness.
I am certain there are exceptions, though.
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness gel..for the
good of the whole.
Being free of cultural influences , I have discovered the way of dharma is
universal, but has nothing whatever to to do with time of place.
My earlier point was regarding many seekers in the West believe that India
is the location for spiritual guidance.
BOfL- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If I am reading you correctly, I do not understand exactly how you
come to the conclusion that Hindu culture is not as spiritually
evolved as some Westerners claim. You cited the caste system. Then you
mentioned that Western karma is "more in our own hands."
I have always thought Hindu karma to very much be in the hands of each
individual practitioner even though it exists within the larger
framework of the societal whole. The limited prospect of upward social
mobility may seem to create a situation in which an individual's karma
is not in their own hands, but that would only be true if the Hindu
belief system was structured around a single life span. Since they do
believe in multiple reincarnations and base their actions through
dharma on creating positive karma which will permit them to
reincarnate to a higher level, I view them as being very much in
control of their individual karma. I think they are simply more
patient and are willing to endure and pace themselves to attain an
ultimate goal than most Westerners. For me, that is worthy of respect
on some level, especially if you remove the phenomenon from social and
political aspects.
The entire process reminds me a bit of certain elements of
Christianity in the West. Though I am not a Christian and cannot speak
from personal beliefs, I think many Christians accept the notion that
suffering in this single life while adhering to basic rules and
regulations of their religion will afford them everlasting peace and
happiness in their afterlife. Christians have a concept centered on
the meek inheriting the Earth which suggests that they should accept
their lot in this life in exchange for a reward in their afterlife.
Frank Zappa famously said something to the effect of "the meek shall
inherit nothing," which is brilliant, insanely funny, or extremely
disrespectful and would apply to both Hindus and Christians. You
decide.
As to which group is more spiritually evolved, I would not feel
qualified to make that judgment. Truthfully, I would consider much
more than tenants of their belief systems in making the judgment. I
would place much more emphasis on how each group lived their lives and
how they interacted with other groups. Then we would get into a debate
about qualitative judgment and its pitfalls.
At any rate, I am not trying to be argumentative. I just enjoy the
discussion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
10 Nov 2007 08:11:22 PM |
|
|
"Voice of Reason" <locust.of.control@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1194704725.423381.220800@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 9, 6:35 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
"Voice of Reason" <locust.of.cont...@gmail.com> wrote in
messagenews:1194620939.774733.140580@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable'
that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception,
is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
Hello - Nice group you have here.
I think this argument overlooks a central component of the Hindu
belief system as regards the caste system - the concept of dharma. I
also think you are placing a higher value on social mobility than
would any practitioner of Hinduism. That may be due to the fact that
you are a product of Western ideals. I am also a product of Western
ideals and tend to view life and its journey in a linear sense with
each step along my path in this one and only life as leading to a
higher level. However, if we want to understand why Hindus are often
satisfied to maintain the order of the caste system and do so with a
great deal of dignity, we will have to divorce ourselves from our
mindsets.
Despite the political or social control aspects that are clearly at
play in India, one can separate the purely ideological tenants of
Hinduism and come away with an appreciation for exactly why the people
are married to the caste system if you understand what dharma is and
how it can allow a person to find grace under pressure and self-
respect and inner strength in poverty.
Several posters mentioned karma, but I did not see anyone mention
dharma. Dharma is doing one's duty according to the caste in which one
was born. Hindus believe that it is better to do one's dharma poorly
than to do another's dharma well. Thus, they would be more inclined to
live out the role and duties of a lower caste if they were born into
that caste than to "strive" to live out the role and duties of a
higher caste if it were not their birth caste. If they expect their
karma to produce a good rebirth resulting in a higher caste placement,
they must do their dharma according to their current caste well. That
is how they can find peace and dignity regardless of caste in this
life.
Also, I think we are more inclined to value individualism in the West
because we do not view ourselves as being a part of a larger whole.
Hindus do see themselves as a part of a larger whole and would be less
likely to resent what we call group consciousness because they would
feel as though they were inextricably tied to the creation of that
group consciousness.
I am certain there are exceptions, though.
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness gel..for the
good of the whole.
Being free of cultural influences , I have discovered the way of dharma
is
universal, but has nothing whatever to to do with time of place.
My earlier point was regarding many seekers in the West believe that
India
is the location for spiritual guidance.
BOfL- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If I am reading you correctly, I do not understand exactly how you
come to the conclusion that Hindu culture is not as spiritually
evolved as some Westerners claim. You cited the caste system. Then you
mentioned that Western karma is "more in our own hands."
In your context, free to 'evolve' spiritually in this life.I would use the
same example for those born into a fundemental Buddhist culture...ie Tibet.
I have always thought Hindu karma to very much be in the hands of each
individual practitioner even though it exists within the larger
framework of the societal whole.
Thereby lies my point. There are many levels of karma, the most advanced
being "instant", wher you have outgrown the group consciousness.
The limited prospect of upward social
mobility may seem to create a situation in which an individual's karma
is not in their own hands, but that would only be true if the Hindu
belief system was structured around a single life span.
The apparent contradiction. This is why there is cultural/race karma, and
individual. Each individual 'has it" but has to grow through the group stage
to recognise/realize this.
Since they do
believe in multiple reincarnations and base their actions through
dharma on creating positive karma which will permit them to
reincarnate to a higher level, I view them as being very much in
control of their individual karma. I think they are simply more
patient and are willing to endure and pace themselves to attain an
ultimate goal than most Westerners. For me, that is worthy of respect
on some level, especially if you remove the phenomenon from social and
political aspects.
All life deserves such respect. The more one realizes this, the more one
observes the total process.
The entire process reminds me a bit of certain elements of
Christianity in the West. Though I am not a Christian and cannot speak
from personal beliefs, I think many Christians accept the notion that
suffering in this single life while adhering to basic rules and
regulations of their religion will afford them everlasting peace and
happiness in their afterlife.
Same limited perspective. All about the "future". Like the story of the
sacred cow, same essence. Keep social order by usingthe carrot or the stick.
Christians have a concept centered on
the meek inheriting the Earth which suggests that they should accept
their lot in this life in exchange for a reward in their afterlife.
Precisely.
Frank Zappa famously said something to the effect of "the meek shall
inherit nothing," which is brilliant, insanely funny, or extremely
disrespectful and would apply to both Hindus and Christians. You
decide.
"For they already have everything" (except, possibly, self esteem) !!!
As to which group is more spiritually evolved, I would not feel
qualified to make that judgment.
I observe individual consciousness and group consciousness, and how overlaps
create learning experiences...over many lifetimes of course.
Truthfully, I would consider much
more than tenants of their belief systems in making the judgment. I
would place much more emphasis on how each group lived their lives and
how they interacted with other groups. Then we would get into a debate
about qualitative judgment and its pitfalls.
At any rate, I am not trying to be argumentative. I just enjoy the
discussion.
It is refreshing. I never argue, just express what I have discovered.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Voice of Reason" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
10 Nov 2007 11:47:54 AM |
|
|
On Nov 10, 9:25 am, Voice of Reason <locust.of.cont...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Nov 9, 6:35 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
"Voice of Reason" <locust.of.cont...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1194620939.774733.140580@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
Hello - Nice group you have here.
I think this argument overlooks a central component of the Hindu
belief system as regards the caste system - the concept of dharma. I
also think you are placing a higher value on social mobility than
would any practitioner of Hinduism. That may be due to the fact that
you are a product of Western ideals. I am also a product of Western
ideals and tend to view life and its journey in a linear sense with
each step along my path in this one and only life as leading to a
higher level. However, if we want to understand why Hindus are often
satisfied to maintain the order of the caste system and do so with a
great deal of dignity, we will have to divorce ourselves from our
mindsets.
Despite the political or social control aspects that are clearly at
play in India, one can separate the purely ideological tenants of
Hinduism and come away with an appreciation for exactly why the people
are married to the caste system if you understand what dharma is and
how it can allow a person to find grace under pressure and self-
respect and inner strength in poverty.
Several posters mentioned karma, but I did not see anyone mention
dharma. Dharma is doing one's duty according to the caste in which one
was born. Hindus believe that it is better to do one's dharma poorly
than to do another's dharma well. Thus, they would be more inclined to
live out the role and duties of a lower caste if they were born into
that caste than to "strive" to live out the role and duties of a
higher caste if it were not their birth caste. If they expect their
karma to produce a good rebirth resulting in a higher caste placement,
they must do their dharma according to their current caste well. That
is how they can find peace and dignity regardless of caste in this
life.
Also, I think we are more inclined to value individualism in the West
because we do not view ourselves as being a part of a larger whole.
Hindus do see themselves as a part of a larger whole and would be less
likely to resent what we call group consciousness because they would
feel as though they were inextricably tied to the creation of that
group consciousness.
I am certain there are exceptions, though.
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness gel..for the
good of the whole.
Being free of cultural influences , I have discovered the way of dharma is
universal, but has nothing whatever to to do with time of place.
My earlier point was regarding many seekers in the West believe that India
is the location for spiritual guidance.
BOfL- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If I am reading you correctly, I do not understand exactly how you
come to the conclusion that Hindu culture is not as spiritually
evolved as some Westerners claim. You cited the caste system. Then you
mentioned that Western karma is "more in our own hands."
I have always thought Hindu karma to very much be in the hands of each
individual practitioner even though it exists within the larger
framework of the societal whole. The limited prospect of upward social
mobility may seem to create a situation in which an individual's karma
is not in their own hands, but that would only be true if the Hindu
belief system was structured around a single life span. Since they do
believe in multiple reincarnations and base their actions through
dharma on creating positive karma which will permit them to
reincarnate to a higher level, I view them as being very much in
control of their individual karma. I think they are simply more
patient and are willing to endure and pace themselves to attain an
ultimate goal than most Westerners. For me, that is worthy of respect
on some level, especially if you remove the phenomenon from social and
political aspects.
The entire process reminds me a bit of certain elements of
Christianity in the West. Though I am not a Christian and cannot speak
from personal beliefs, I think many Christians accept the notion that
suffering in this single life while adhering to basic rules and
regulations of their religion will afford them everlasting peace and
happiness in their afterlife. Christians have a concept centered on
the meek inheriting the Earth which suggests that they should accept
their lot in this life in exchange for a reward in their afterlife.
Frank Zappa famously said something to the effect of "the meek shall
inherit nothing," which is brilliant, insanely funny, or extremely
disrespectful and would apply to both Hindus and Christians. You
decide.
As to which group is more spiritually evolved, I would not feel
qualified to make that judgment. Truthfully, I would consider much
more than tenants of their belief systems in making the judgment. I
would place much more emphasis on how each group lived their lives and
how they interacted with other groups. Then we would get into a debate
about qualitative judgment and its pitfalls.
At any rate, I am not trying to be argumentative. I just enjoy the
discussion.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And, I did not mean to write 'tenants" for "tenets." They are almost
homophones which is probably why I did so in haste and noticed in
later. :-)
I think you raised a very interesting issue in your initial post, so
please do not take my questioning as anything other than avid interest
in your views.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
10 Nov 2007 08:12:11 PM |
|
|
"Voice of Reason" <locust.of.control@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1194716874.107530.83520@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 10, 9:25 am, Voice of Reason <locust.of.cont...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Nov 9, 6:35 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
"Voice of Reason" <locust.of.cont...@gmail.com> wrote in
messagenews:1194620939.774733.140580@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable'
that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular
perception, is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the
'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
Hello - Nice group you have here.
I think this argument overlooks a central component of the Hindu
belief system as regards the caste system - the concept of dharma. I
also think you are placing a higher value on social mobility than
would any practitioner of Hinduism. That may be due to the fact that
you are a product of Western ideals. I am also a product of Western
ideals and tend to view life and its journey in a linear sense with
each step along my path in this one and only life as leading to a
higher level. However, if we want to understand why Hindus are often
satisfied to maintain the order of the caste system and do so with a
great deal of dignity, we will have to divorce ourselves from our
mindsets.
Despite the political or social control aspects that are clearly at
play in India, one can separate the purely ideological tenants of
Hinduism and come away with an appreciation for exactly why the
people
are married to the caste system if you understand what dharma is and
how it can allow a person to find grace under pressure and self-
respect and inner strength in poverty.
Several posters mentioned karma, but I did not see anyone mention
dharma. Dharma is doing one's duty according to the caste in which
one
was born. Hindus believe that it is better to do one's dharma poorly
than to do another's dharma well. Thus, they would be more inclined
to
live out the role and duties of a lower caste if they were born into
that caste than to "strive" to live out the role and duties of a
higher caste if it were not their birth caste. If they expect their
karma to produce a good rebirth resulting in a higher caste
placement,
they must do their dharma according to their current caste well. That
is how they can find peace and dignity regardless of caste in this
life.
Also, I think we are more inclined to value individualism in the West
because we do not view ourselves as being a part of a larger whole.
Hindus do see themselves as a part of a larger whole and would be
less
likely to resent what we call group consciousness because they would
feel as though they were inextricably tied to the creation of that
group consciousness.
I am certain there are exceptions, though.
I do understand how different levels of group consciousness gel..for
the
good of the whole.
Being free of cultural influences , I have discovered the way of dharma
is
universal, but has nothing whatever to to do with time of place.
My earlier point was regarding many seekers in the West believe that
India
is the location for spiritual guidance.
BOfL- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If I am reading you correctly, I do not understand exactly how you
come to the conclusion that Hindu culture is not as spiritually
evolved as some Westerners claim. You cited the caste system. Then you
mentioned that Western karma is "more in our own hands."
I have always thought Hindu karma to very much be in the hands of each
individual practitioner even though it exists within the larger
framework of the societal whole. The limited prospect of upward social
mobility may seem to create a situation in which an individual's karma
is not in their own hands, but that would only be true if the Hindu
belief system was structured around a single life span. Since they do
believe in multiple reincarnations and base their actions through
dharma on creating positive karma which will permit them to
reincarnate to a higher level, I view them as being very much in
control of their individual karma. I think they are simply more
patient and are willing to endure and pace themselves to attain an
ultimate goal than most Westerners. For me, that is worthy of respect
on some level, especially if you remove the phenomenon from social and
political aspects.
The entire process reminds me a bit of certain elements of
Christianity in the West. Though I am not a Christian and cannot speak
from personal beliefs, I think many Christians accept the notion that
suffering in this single life while adhering to basic rules and
regulations of their religion will afford them everlasting peace and
happiness in their afterlife. Christians have a concept centered on
the meek inheriting the Earth which suggests that they should accept
their lot in this life in exchange for a reward in their afterlife.
Frank Zappa famously said something to the effect of "the meek shall
inherit nothing," which is brilliant, insanely funny, or extremely
disrespectful and would apply to both Hindus and Christians. You
decide.
As to which group is more spiritually evolved, I would not feel
qualified to make that judgment. Truthfully, I would consider much
more than tenants of their belief systems in making the judgment. I
would place much more emphasis on how each group lived their lives and
how they interacted with other groups. Then we would get into a debate
about qualitative judgment and its pitfalls.
At any rate, I am not trying to be argumentative. I just enjoy the
discussion.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And, I did not mean to write 'tenants" for "tenets." They are almost
homophones which is probably why I did so in haste and noticed in
later. :-)
I think you raised a very interesting issue in your initial post, so
please do not take my questioning as anything other than avid interest
in your views.
Thats clear :-)
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "kevirwin" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
07 Nov 2007 09:42:52 PM |
|
|
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
I read about the cast system at school in the 50's...That can't still
be the case **today**, can it???
K e v
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 01:54:11 AM |
|
|
"kevirwin" <kevirwin@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1194493372.962126.222160@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
I read about the cast system at school in the 50's...That can't still
be the case **today**, can it???
Are you talking to me??? AREYOU TALKING TO _ME_???...:-)
Thats regularly heard if someone from a lower caste talks to someone
slightly higher on the streets of Delhi.
Of course the there is a more advanced approach at the top end, but very
limited.
Same mentality which allows the cows to roam free....
BOfL
K e v
.
|
|
|
| User: "bernardZ" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 02:47:00 AM |
|
|
In article <DgzYi.9920$CN4.5836@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, brianf88
@bigpond.net.au says...
"kevirwin" <kevirwin@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1194493372.962126.222160@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
I read about the cast system at school in the 50's...That can't still
be the case **today**, can it???
Are you talking to me??? AREYOU TALKING TO _ME_???...:-)
Thats regularly heard if someone from a lower caste talks to someone
slightly higher on the streets of Delhi.
Of course the there is a more advanced approach at the top end, but very
limited.
Same mentality which allows the cows to roam free....
BOfL
K e v
I have been to India a few times and work with Indians in a Western
environment and I can assure you that the cast system is still important
to them.
In the villages in India it is more important still.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 09:29:40 PM |
|
|
"bernardZ" <BernardZ@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.219d7811e4e8ebb0989681@news...
In article <DgzYi.9920$CN4.5836@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, brianf88
@bigpond.net.au says...
"kevirwin" <kevirwin@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1194493372.962126.222160@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their
place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable'
that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception,
is
not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of
things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
I read about the cast system at school in the 50's...That can't still
be the case **today**, can it???
Are you talking to me??? AREYOU TALKING TO _ME_???...:-)
Thats regularly heard if someone from a lower caste talks to someone
slightly higher on the streets of Delhi.
Of course the there is a more advanced approach at the top end, but very
limited.
Same mentality which allows the cows to roam free....
BOfL
K e v
I have been to India a few times and work with Indians in a Western
environment and I can assure you that the cast system is still important
to them.
In the villages in India it is more important still.
Bollywood is making a movie at my place, which is what inspired the thread.
Ruddybloody 'mazin...
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "pico" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 09:37:14 PM |
|
|
"brian fletcher" <brianf88@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:EuQYi.10235$CN4.4455@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Jeeze, Brian! Do you ever sleep?
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
09 Nov 2007 06:02:12 AM |
|
|
"pico" <pico@pico.net> wrote in message
news:13j7lfbqjlevp90@news.supernews.com...
"brian fletcher" <brianf88@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:EuQYi.10235$CN4.4455@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Jeeze, Brian! Do you ever sleep?
Relatively ! heheheheh
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Stockbauer" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
07 Nov 2007 10:04:12 PM |
|
|
On Nov 7, 9:42 pm, kevirwin <kevir...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, "brian fletcher" <brian...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
The caste system in India is notorious for 'keeping people in their place'.
If you are born a Brahman, you die a Brahman, if an 'untouchable' that's
your lot for life. The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
Generally we are free to develop our own place in the 'scheme of things'.Our
karma is more in our own hands than in such cultures, where the 'group
consciousness' rules the roost.
BOfL
I read about the cast system at school in the 50's...That can't still
be the case **today**, can it???
K e v
Only when filming movies.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ZerkonX" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 08:49:48 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:46:00 +0000, brian fletcher wrote:
The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
I have no idea what you mean by 'popular perception'. Could you explain
this? The West has always considered India to be something less ever
since the days England was growing opium there and shipping it to China.
The people of India have had a continuous civilization since 2500 B.C.
Their religious traditions, which are part of this cultural 'weight', are
traced back even before this time.
It has been only recently that 'the west' emerged from their own cast
practice of feudalism. Also, the 'freedom' this implies is still much more
in word than practice.
In the west, the trend, as I see it, is not moving towards 'karma being in
our own hands', quit the opposite. This is a matter of opinion, I suppose,
but I think I have a good case in making such a claim of heresy.
Consider this court opinion by an Indian Supreme court:
===============
When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not
impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it.
Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any
one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any
one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not
follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does
not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion of
creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.
================
Yea, west! We da best!! Ra Ra West. Our team rules!!
So what and now what?
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 09:40:22 PM |
|
|
"ZerkonX" <ZERKON@zerkonx.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.11.08.14.49.47.996757@zerkonx.net...
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:46:00 +0000, brian fletcher wrote:
The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
I have no idea what you mean by 'popular perception'.
Then you obviously dont share such perception.
Many people believe thats the place to find a guru, to search for
enlightenment.
Could you explain
this? The West has always considered India to be something less ever
since the days England was growing opium there and shipping it to China.
The people of India have had a continuous civilization since 2500 B.C.
Their religious traditions, which are part of this cultural 'weight', are
traced back even before this time.
It has been only recently that 'the west' emerged from their own cast
practice of feudalism. Also, the 'freedom' this implies is still much more
in word than practice.
But moving ahead neverthless. The more free one is, the more freedom to
pursue the inner search.
In the west, the trend, as I see it, is not moving towards 'karma being in
our own hands', quit the opposite. This is a matter of opinion, I suppose,
but I think I have a good case in making such a claim of heresy.
In the west you are free to be an "untouchable" or president (not much
difference, other than bodily cleanliness :-)
Consider this court opinion by an Indian Supreme court:
===============
When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not
impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it.
Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any
one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any
one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not
follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does
not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion of
creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.
Maybe when 'we' think of the HIndu religion....but thats different from what
"I think".
The 'lessor' gods stem from the trilogy Shiva, Brahma and Vishnu.the
creater, maintainer and destroyer, all working below the "godhead".
Lesser gods=lesser people.
================
Yea, west! We da best!! Ra Ra West. Our team rules!!
So what and now what?
Not a relavent question if your are not free to create your own karma.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 02:31:51 PM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 8:49 am, ZerkonX <ZER...@zerkonx.net> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:46:00 +0000, brian fletcher wrote:
The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
I have no idea what you mean by 'popular perception'. Could you explain
this? The West has always considered India to be something less ever
since the days England was growing opium there and shipping it to China.
I think he would be referring to the traditional view of Western
materialism vs. Eastern spiritualism.
You should've probably got your answer first...
The people of India have had a continuous civilization since 2500 B.C.
Their religious traditions, which are part of this cultural 'weight', are
traced back even before this time.
It has been only recently that 'the west' emerged from their own cast
practice of feudalism. Also, the 'freedom' this implies is still much more
in word than practice.
In the west, the trend, as I see it, is not moving towards 'karma being in
our own hands', quit the opposite. This is a matter of opinion, I suppose,
but I think I have a good case in making such a claim of heresy.
Consider this court opinion by an Indian Supreme court:
===============
When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not
impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it.
Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any
one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any
one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not
follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does
not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion of
creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.
================
Yea, west! We da best!! Ra Ra West. Our team rules!!
So what and now what?
I wonder if you've read "Lies My Teacher Told Me". If not, I bet
you'd like it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 09:42:38 PM |
|
|
<zob95@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1194553911.093112.319800@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 8, 8:49 am, ZerkonX <ZER...@zerkonx.net> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:46:00 +0000, brian fletcher wrote:
The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
I have no idea what you mean by 'popular perception'. Could you explain
this? The West has always considered India to be something less ever
since the days England was growing opium there and shipping it to China.
I think he would be referring to the traditional view of Western
materialism vs. Eastern spiritualism.
Correct!
;-)
BOfL
You should've probably got your answer first...
The people of India have had a continuous civilization since 2500 B.C.
Their religious traditions, which are part of this cultural 'weight', are
traced back even before this time.
It has been only recently that 'the west' emerged from their own cast
practice of feudalism. Also, the 'freedom' this implies is still much
more
in word than practice.
In the west, the trend, as I see it, is not moving towards 'karma being
in
our own hands', quit the opposite. This is a matter of opinion, I
suppose,
but I think I have a good case in making such a claim of heresy.
Consider this court opinion by an Indian Supreme court:
===============
When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not
impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it.
Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim
any
one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to
any
one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does
not
follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does
not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion of
creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.
================
Yea, west! We da best!! Ra Ra West. Our team rules!!
So what and now what?
I wonder if you've read "Lies My Teacher Told Me". If not, I bet
you'd like it.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 10:13:00 AM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 9:49 am, ZerkonX <ZER...@zerkonx.net> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:46:00 +0000, brian fletcher wrote:
The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
I have no idea what you mean by 'popular perception'. Could you explain
this? The West has always considered India to be something less ever
since the days England was growing opium there and shipping it to China.
The people of India have had a continuous civilization since 2500 B.C.
Their religious traditions, which are part of this cultural 'weight', are
traced back even before this time.
It has been only recently that 'the west' emerged from their own cast
practice of feudalism. Also, the 'freedom' this implies is still much more
in word than practice.
In the west, the trend, as I see it, is not moving towards 'karma being in
our own hands', quit the opposite. This is a matter of opinion, I suppose,
but I think I have a good case in making such a claim of heresy.
Consider this court opinion by an Indian Supreme court:
===============
When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not
impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it.
Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any
one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any
one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not
follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does
not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion of
creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.
================
Yea, west! We da best!! Ra Ra West. Our team rules!!
So what and now what?
Since most people on these post believe in nothing, I think your
response in very poignant. There really is no point to culturalism.
However, I do think ones belief system is important. Not so much
because of its cultural significance, but because of its impact upon
my life. Do my beliefs make me a better person, do they encourage me
to do good works, do they help me define my worth and the worth of
others, do they prepare me for the future?
.
|
|
|
| User: "brian fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Another example of "group truth" versus individual awareness. |
08 Nov 2007 09:41:45 PM |
|
|
<MichaelNJ@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1194538380.242913.55290@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 8, 9:49 am, ZerkonX <ZER...@zerkonx.net> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:46:00 +0000, brian fletcher wrote:
The Hindu culture, contrary to popular perception, is not
as well evolved spiritually as 'the west'.
I have no idea what you mean by 'popular perception'. Could you explain
this? The West has always considered India to be something less ever
since the days England was growing opium there and shipping it to China.
The people of India have had a continuous civilization since 2500 B.C.
Their religious traditions, which are part of this cultural 'weight', are
traced back even before this time.
It has been only recently that 'the west' emerged from their own cast
practice of feudalism. Also, the 'freedom' this implies is still much
more
in word than practice.
In the west, the trend, as I see it, is not moving towards 'karma being
in
our own hands', quit the opposite. This is a matter of opinion, I
suppose,
but I think I have a good case in making such a claim of heresy.
Consider this court opinion by an Indian Supreme court:
===============
When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not
impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it.
Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim
any
one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to
any
one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does
not
follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does
not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion of
creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.
================
Yea, west! We da best!! Ra Ra West. Our team rules!!
So what and now what?
Since most people on these post believe in nothing, I think your
response in very poignant. There really is no point to culturalism.
However, I do think ones belief system is important. Not so much
because of its cultural significance, but because of its impact upon
my life. Do my beliefs make me a better person, do they encourage me
to do good works, do they help me define my worth and the worth of
others, do they prepare me for the future?
Of course they prepare you for the future..only problem, the future is an
illusion.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
